JUDGMENT :

S. MANIKUMAR, J.

1. Before Kerala Lok Ayukta, Thiruvananthapuram, in Complaint No. 982/2018, respondent Nos.1 to 3/complainants therein, sought for the following reliefs:

(i) The Hon’ble Lok Ayukta may be pleased to pass an order directing the respondents to stop the illegal proceedings for taking possession, eviction and auction proceeding initiated by the 1st respondent as per Exhibits P1, P2, P3, P4 notices.

(ii) The Hon’ble Lok Ayukta may be pleased to direct the respondent to produce the “Statement of Account” in this regard.

(iii) The Hon’ble Lok Ayuktha may be pleased to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider Ext.P5 Requisition Letter dated 25.10.2018.

(iv) The Hon’ble Lok Ayukta may be pleased to conduct a detailed investigation into the actions/inactions on the part of respondents and draw a report U/s. 12 (1) of Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, 1999.

(v) Such other relief which the Hon’ble Upa Lok Ayukta deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2. Exhibit P1 before the Lok Ayukta is a possession notice dated 21.03.2017 issued by Authorised Officer of Thrissur District Co-operative Bank Ltd. Thrissur, the petitioner herein, to respondents 1 to 3/the complainants therein, demanding to repay the entire loan amount of Rs. 1,35,24,539/- as on 28.02.2017.

3. Exhibit P2 before the Lok Ayukta is a possession notice dated 02.08.2017 issued by the Authorised Officer, Thrissur District Co-operative Bank Ltd. Thrissur, the petitioner herein to respondent Nos.1 to 3/the complainants therein, demanding to pay Rs. 1,41,05,489/- as on 30.06.2017.

4. Exhibit P3 is a notice published by the petitioner herein, in Deshabhimani Daily dated 8.8.2017, demanding the respondents to pay a sum Rs. 1,31,08,690/- as on 31.11.2016, and Exhibit P4 is a notice issued by the learned Advocate Commissioner, appointed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate in Crl. M.P. No. 6016/2018, dated 17.10.2018, for taking possession of the property mortgaged to the loan by the complainants.

5. Before the Lok Ayukta, complainants sought to quash Exhibits P1 to P4 notices by issuing an order directing the respondent therein, to stop the proceedings initiated for taking possession, eviction and auction proceedings initiated by the Authorised Officer of the writ petitioner bank.

6. After considering the rival submissions and material on record, on 2nd November, 2018, the Lok Ayukta, in Complaint No. No. 982/2018 C & I.A. No. 1645/2018, passed the following order:

“ORDER:

Heard the counsel for the complainant. Though there is no much merit in the complaint being a loan transaction the proposed sale of the scheduled properties offered as security for paltry amounts to cause harassment to complainants is something which has to be averted and they are to be given an opportunity to discharge the debt, if at all they are vigilant in discharging the debt. For that purpose, I admit the complaint for regular investigation.

In the meanwhile, in case each of the complainants deposits an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- each in respect of loan accounts, further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1, P2, P3 and P4 shall stand stayed for a period of two months Deposit shall stand stayed for a period of two months. Deposit shall positively be made within one month from today. In case the deposit is not so made, the stay shall stand automatically vacated and the respondents shall be entitled to proceed with the proposed sale. It is made clear that if further extension of stay also is required, complainants will have to deposit further amounts of at least Rs. 1,00,000/- each.

Communicate this order to respondents through special messenger as desired by counsel for the complainant. In as much as special messenger is being deputed, notice in the complaint as also notice in the IA shall also be served to respondents through the same special messenger. For RN, posted to 21.12.2018.”

7. Short facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are that, petitioner is a Central Society, registered